Kathleen Parker’s June 2 column drew a compelling picture of a school lunch program gone awry — of districts having to purchase or lease more Dumpsters to accommodate food that kids detest and are throwing away.

There’s one problem. It’s not true, at least in the Rockford Public Schools.

We’d like to offer you another image, and it’s from Conklin School in February. Because of the regular feedback, surveys and taste tests our staff does, we knew that Conklin kids did not like carrots.

Or, they didn’t think they liked carrots.

A Nutrition Services employee decided to do her own test. She took steamed carrots and placed them in small cups. She went from table to table at Conklin’s lunchtime, offering up the carrots with a smile. Before too long, the students bit. They tried the carrots and liked them. Now, carrots are part of their menu.

Not only did these vegetables avoid the fate of the Dumpster, they have become part of a well-rounded, nutritious, custom-designed menu for Conklin. It works like that in a lot of our schools.

Yes, we must design meals that meet a myriad of state and federal guidelines. Sometimes it is a challenge. But within those guidelines, we have flexibility. So do students.

Take our share cart, for example. Students have the option of placing food they do not want — non-entrée items such as fruit, milk or juice — on the share cart. The food is then available to other students. The share cart is well-liked and well-used.

In the last two years, we have hired a district chef and a sous chef. These staff members have overhauled our recipes and menus — within federal requirements — taking into account regional taste preferences and individual school likes and dislikes. They work with our vendors to get the best, most tasty food for the taxpayer dollar. They have also prompted us to focus on better presentation of food. Research has shown what looks good, tastes good.

When we were trying to get students to try hummus, for example, we decided to put the carrots and the cucumbers in the hummus cup. Before long, students were seen licking the hummus off the ends of the vegetables and figuring the stuff wasn’t so gross, after all.

Do all our students like all our food? Of course not. Is there some food waste at our schools? Of course there is.

But, we also have a luxury many districts don’t have.

Because of help from a 2012 voter-approved referendum, we have been able to add more production kitchens to our elementary schools. At these kitchens, our cafeteria workers can make food fresh, reducing the reliance on canned or frozen. Best of all, the food smells good as it’s being cooked. The aromas wafting through the building have encouraged our staff members to start eating the school lunch, too.

Page 2 of 2 - In all, 33 of our 47 schools have a production kitchen. For the 14 other schools with satellite kitchens, we have made sure they are close enough to their “feeder” kitchen so the food comes to them by truck as soon as possible.

You may have heard that we brought back chocolate milk this school year. That was not only a bow to student demand; the flavored milk is now fat-free, lower in sugar and higher in protein. What you may not have heard: Our district fryers are now gone. All of our food is now baked or steamed instead of fried.

Ms. Parker’s column was provocative, for sure, but we won’t be entering that food fight. In the Rockford Public Schools, we’re proud of the changes we have made that will lead to better and more nutritious choices for our students.

Renita Weiskircher is director of Nutrition Services for the Rockford Public Schools.